Are you sure you
want to go down that slippery slope? You must think you need money pretty
badly, to "sell" our precious public lands to the highest bidder…. My
heartfelt thanks to Doug Siden and John Sutter for voting against that
boondoggle! Judging from your budgets, the main reason that you "need more
money" is that you operate in a very money-intensive way -- totally
dependent on motor vehicles and all that goes with them: roads and parking lots
(especially paved ones), enforcement of auto-related crimes, etc.

I guess you, like most
people, still haven't accepted the fact that we are running out of oil
(especially our own!), and you should therefore start planning for a
motor-vehicle-free park system. And now that I mention it, water isn't getting
any more plentiful, either! Humans have already appropriated 50 percent of the
world's fresh water supply. Wasteful uses of fresh water, like water parks and
cattle grazing, are already obsolete.

Ayn Wieskamp's argument
for the water park is classic, but specious: the area has already been messed
up (it used to be a quarry), and therefore, it's okay to mess it up some
more. I hope Ms. Wieskamp doesn't apply that same reasoning in her own home….
In fact, aren't most of the world's problems caused by people applying
logic that they would never use in their own homes and lives?!

And how do you expect to
be able to ask the public for money, after they see you raking it in -- and
especially, through lowering your standards?